Coaches: How much do you vary your defensive systems in-season?

[pgfan66]

When the Edmonton Oilers went from Woodcroft to Knoblauch last season, their defensive systems were the main talking point. I don't think that topic has ever had as much attention before, although it's an integral part of how a team plays. So I was wondering: As coaches, how much do you vary your defensive systems in-season, whether it be to adapt to the opponent or change things up when it's not going well.

It's normal to make small tweaks and adjustments based on the opponent, like always wanting to keep two players net-front, overloading more or less against certain opponents, or changing how closely weak-side opponents should be guarded in man coverage. But do/would you make bigger changes like going from a pure zone to a hybrid, e.g. when you know your opponent likes to bring three or four guys up high?

Appreciate your thoughts!

Click to read more...

 

[oldunclehue]

I coach U15AA hockey, during the season our defensive zone coverage didn't change. But forecheck would be the only think we change depending on the game, score, other team. From a 2-1-2 to a 1-2-2 or a 1-3-1 usually just to slow down opposition. Otherwise I don't know many teams that in minor hockey would change the defensive zone structure.

 

[Primary Assist]

This depends on the age and skill level of the players. My experience is with the varsity level of US high school, and I've found that players can take almost a full season to really understand and execute the defensive structure. This varies by player too, of course, but it seems like a simple rule of thumb.

So if you are expecting to change your structure mid season, just keep in mind that you likely won't see the real benefit of this change til later on. Especially if your schedule is filled with more games than practices at this point. You will need all of classroom, video, and on-ice time to make the change successfully.

My guess is that you're unhappy with the results of the current structure if you're looking to change, but it's possible (if not probable) the actual on-ice product as players get accustomed to the new system will be worse than the status quo.

Edit - I am also a big, believer in John Wooden's coaching philosophy of sticking to your own game plan (within reason) rather than tailoring your style of play and expectations based your opponent. You will know your team's strength and weaknesses much better than another team's, so if you try too hard to play their game they will beat you with their own experience.

This isn't to discourage you from making the small tweaks you mentioned in the OP (like adjusting for different PP/PK setups) but changing from zone to hybrid to (worst of all) man on man would be a really big change.

 

[pgfan66]

I coach U15AA hockey, during the season our defensive zone coverage didn't change. But forecheck would be the only think we change depending on the game, score, other team. From a 2-1-2 to a 1-2-2 or a 1-3-1 usually just to slow down opposition. Otherwise I don't know many teams that in minor hockey would change the defensive zone structure.

This depends on the age and skill level of the players. My experience is with the varsity level of US high school, and I've found that players can take almost a full season to really understand and execute the defensive structure. This varies by player too, of course, but it seems like a simple rule of thumb.

So if you are expecting to change your structure mid season, just keep in mind that you likely won't see the real benefit of this change til later on. Especially if your schedule is filled with more games than practices at this point. You will need all of classroom, video, and on-ice time to make the change successfully.

My guess is that you're unhappy with the results of the current structure if you're looking to change, but it's possible (if not probable) the actual on-ice product as players get accustomed to the new system will be worse than the status quo.

Edit - I am also a big, believer in John Wooden's coaching philosophy of sticking to your own game plan (within reason) rather than tailoring your style of play and expectations based your opponent. You will know your team's strength and weaknesses much better than another team's, so if you try too hard to play their game they will beat you with their own experience.

This isn't to discourage you from making the small tweaks you mentioned in the OP (like adjusting for different PP/PK setups) but changing from zone to hybrid to (worst of all) man on man would be a really big change.

Thanks for the responses! The question actually came up because what both of you are saying is how I've been doing it too and it feels like the right approach. But I was watching a couple games of the third-tier (semi-)pro league in Germany after their coach mentioned he made defensive adjustments for their first playoff opponent.

All season they were in a very basic LW-C-RW box+1 where all they might vary was how aggressive they'd be in corner battles. Sometimes they'd send the second D in and have the C cover net-front, other times they'd just have the C in the support zone. Other than that, they'd just switch at the hashmarks and keep their D and C net-front and responsible for their corners.

For this playoff opponent, they suddenly changed it to more of a hybrid. The D would aggressively flush out puck carriers along the boards and follow all the way to the blue line, with everyone else switching to man-on-man too. On lost face-offs they had the outside D follow his check too, even if he went up to the blue line between his D. On low-to-high passes, they usually stayed in their box+1 where the C would stay low unless there was a clear open shooting lane on 3-high plays. On D pinches with and without the puck, the covering winger would follow man-on-man.

That team was awful defensively all season, one of the worst in goals against and their coverage was a mess. So I was really surprised to see them make this change in the most important part of the season – and I was even more surprised to see them pull it off really well and winning the best-of-3 series 2-1 and 2-0. They only had a couple of breakdowns on missed assignments, but not nearly as much as I would've expected. This is a semi-pro league, so while they're more advanced than U15, most of them certainly aren't high end.